C2C Investments Pty Ltd, in the matter of C2C Investments Pty Ltd v Leigh

Case

[2011] FCA 307

28 March 2011


FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

C2C Investments Pty Ltd, in the matter of C2C Investments Pty Ltd v Leigh [2011] FCA 307

Citation: C2C Investments Pty Ltd, in the matter of C2C Investments Pty Ltd v Leigh [2011] FCA 307
Parties: C2C INVESTMENTS PTY LTD ACN 102 331 840 and GEOFFREY ANTHONY SHANNON v DAVID JOHN LEIGH TRADING AS PPB (NORTHERN NSW) (A FIRM) and REGISTRAR GENERAL OF NEW SOUTH WALES
File number(s): NSD 454 of 2010
Judge: YATES J
Date of judgment: 28 March 2011
Date of hearing: 28 March 2011
Place: Sydney
Division: GENERAL DIVISION
Category: No catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 6
Counsel for the First Defendant: Mr P Walsh

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

GENERAL DIVISION

NSD 454 of 2010

BETWEEN:

C2C INVESTMENTS PTY LTD ACN 102 331 840
First Plaintiff

GEOFFREY ANTHONY SHANNON
Second Plaintiff

AND:

DAVID JOHN LEIGH TRADING AS PPB (NORTHERN NSW) (A FIRM)
First Defendant

REGISTRAR GENERAL OF NEW SOUTH WALES
Second Defendant

JUDGE:

YATES J

DATE OF ORDER:

28 MARCH 2011

WHERE MADE:

SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.Orders 2 and 3 made on 7 March 2011 be vacated.

2.The first plaintiff and the second plaintiff pay the first defendant’s costs of and incidental to the appearance on 28 March 2011.

Note:Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
The text of entered orders can be located using Federal Law Search on the Court’s website.


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

GENERAL DIVISION

NSD 454 of 2010

BETWEEN:

C2C INVESTMENTS PTY LTD ACN 102 331 840
First Plaintiff

GEOFFREY ANTHONY SHANNON
Second Plaintiff

AND:

DAVID JOHN LEIGH TRADING AS PPB (NORTHERN NSW) (A FIRM)
First Defendant

REGISTRAR GENERAL OF NEW SOUTH WALES
Second Defendant

JUDGE:

YATES J

DATE:

28 MARCH 2011

PLACE:

SYDNEY

EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
(REVISED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT)

  1. This matter comes before me today on the basis that the first defendant seeks orders that orders 2 and 3 made by me on 7 March 2011 be vacated.  Those orders were that the first defendant file and serve a written outline of submissions by 1 April 2011 and that the plaintiff’s motion and the proceedings stand over for directions at 9.30 am on 4 April 2011.  The plaintiffs’ motion referred to in those orders was one seeking orders that the first defendant’s cross-claim filed in the proceedings be dismissed.

  2. When the matter was called on for hearing this morning there was no appearance by the plaintiffs.  The matter has been called outside the Court.  There is still no appearance. 

  3. The affidavit of Stefan Peter Psaltis, sworn 25 March 2011, has been read. That affidavit sets out the history of the matter commencing from the making of orders on 25 November 2010, in which I made an order by consent that the first and second plaintiffs pay the first defendant’s costs of the proceedings to date, including the plaintiff’s notice of motion filed 11 November 2010, on an indemnity basis, as agreed or taxed.  On that day I also granted leave to the first defendant to tax his costs forthwith.

  4. The affidavit of Mr Psaltis records that there has been a taxation and that a certificate of taxation has been served on both the first and second plaintiffs.  Costs were taxed in the sum of $35,418.43.  Those costs have not been paid. 

  5. When I made the orders on 25 November 2010, I also ordered, by consent, that, in the event that the first defendant’s costs were not paid in full within 30 days of demand, the proceeding be stayed pending payment of those costs.  That condition has been satisfied in the sense that the defendant’s taxed costs have not been paid within 30 days of demand.  It follows that, in accordance with that order, the proceedings are stayed.

  6. In those circumstances I propose to vacate orders 2 and 3 that I made on 7 March 2011.  The first defendant’s costs of the application today are to be paid by the plaintiffs.

I certify that the preceding six (6) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Yates j.

Associate:

Dated:        31 March 2011

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0